What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4690829 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants name and contact details.

How much money was awarded in case 4690829?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4690829?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4690829?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9481769-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4690829 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants name and contact details.

How much money was awarded in case 4690829?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4690829?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4690829?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9481769-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

779 State Highway 35, Tirohanga, RD 1, Opotiki 3197 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4690829 — Healthy homes

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants name and contact details.
The Tribunal declares there is a valid tenancy between Mr White and [The tenant/s].
The Tribunal orders the landlord to provide possession of the tenancy to the tenant immediately.
The hearing is adjourned, if possession is not provided immediately, the tenant may seek a further hearing from which the Tribunal will consider a monetary order against the landlord.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the tenant against the landlord. The tenant seeks orders in relation to the landlord refusing to give the tenant possession of the premises after a tenancy agreement was entered into.
The background in this case can be summarised succinctly as follows: a. The landlord, David White, appointed [real estate agent] to be his agent for the rental of the tenancy premises. b. [Real estate agent] subsequently entered into a fixed term tenancy between 20 September 2023 and 19 December 2023 with [The tenant/s]. c. The landlord was subsequently displeased with the work of [real estate agent], and in particular the result of pre-tenancy credit checks. d. The landlord refused to hand over possession of the tenancy. e. The landlord discontinued his relationship with [real estate agent]. f. The tenant has applied for orders from the Tribunal so he can take possession of the premises. g. I convened a telephone hearing on 2 October 2023.
At the hearing [The tenant/s] confirmed he had not been given possession of the premises, and he wishes to move in otherwise he will be homeless.
Mr White advised that in his view [real estate agent] had not done an adequate job, and failed to do the necessary checks before entering into the tenancy agreement with [The tenant/s]. Mr White also advised the premises are not Healthy Homes Standards compliant, and that he does not have the money in order to bring the premises up to standard. 1
At the hearing I advised Mr White that the law is not on his side in this case, in that he appears to have entered into a valid tenancy agreement with [The tenant/s], and that requires that he hand over possession of the premises to his tenant as he is now contractually bound to do.
The fact that Mr White does not consider that [real estate agent] did a good job is not relevant. What is relevant is that Mr White appointed an agent, and it is well settled law that the acts of an agent, are deemed to be the acts of the principal (Mr White). When an agent enters into a contract with someone on behalf of their principal, the principal is bound by that contracting. The signature on the tenancy agreement (the contract) of the agent is deemed the signature of the principal.
It is important to emphasise that I have not heard from [real estate agent] in this dispute so I do not know what they would say, but the issue is not whether [real estate agent] did a good job for Mr White, but whether Mr White is required to hand to his tenant possession of the tenancy – and I find he is.
Section 37 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) applies. That provision confirms that: 1 Which Mr White says involves installing extractor fans. The tenant shall have vacant possession of the premises on the date on which, in accordance with the tenancy agreement, the tenant is entitled to enter into occupation of the premises.
Mr White states that the premises do not meet the Healthy Homes Standards. That is not a reason possession cannot transfer to [The tenant/s]. Mr White has 90 days from 20 September 2023 to get the premises HHS compliant.
At this stage the Tribunal will make a declaration that the tenancy is valid, and requiring Mr White to hand over possession to the tenant. If Mr White fails to comply with that, then [The tenant/s] can request a further hearing at which time I will consider making monetary orders against Mr White, which could include orders in relation to exemplary damages, compensation for any loss incurred by [The tenant/s] and general damages.
Mr White said he did not have [The tenant/s] phone number. I confirmed that I would record it in this order to assist Mr White, the number is [redacted].

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants name and contact details.
The Tribunal declares there is a valid tenancy between Mr White and [The tenant/s].
The Tribunal orders the landlord to provide possession of the tenancy to the tenant immediately.
The hearing is adjourned, if possession is not provided immediately, the tenant may seek a further hearing from which the Tribunal will consider a monetary order against the landlord.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the tenant against the landlord. The tenant seeks orders in relation to the landlord refusing to give the tenant possession of the premises after a tenancy agreement was entered into.
The background in this case can be summarised succinctly as follows: a. The landlord, David White, appointed [real estate agent] to be his agent for the rental of the tenancy premises. b. [Real estate agent] subsequently entered into a fixed term tenancy between 20 September 2023 and 19 December 2023 with [The tenant/s]. c. The landlord was subsequently displeased with the work of [real estate agent], and in particular the result of pre-tenancy credit checks. d. The landlord refused to hand over possession of the tenancy. e. The landlord discontinued his relationship with [real estate agent]. f. The tenant has applied for orders from the Tribunal so he can take possession of the premises. g. I convened a telephone hearing on 2 October 2023.
At the hearing [The tenant/s] confirmed he had not been given possession of the premises, and he wishes to move in otherwise he will be homeless.
Mr White advised that in his view [real estate agent] had not done an adequate job, and failed to do the necessary checks before entering into the tenancy agreement with [The tenant/s]. Mr White also advised the premises are not Healthy Homes Standards compliant, and that he does not have the money in order to bring the premises up to standard. 1
At the hearing I advised Mr White that the law is not on his side in this case, in that he appears to have entered into a valid tenancy agreement with [The tenant/s], and that requires that he hand over possession of the premises to his tenant as he is now contractually bound to do.
The fact that Mr White does not consider that [real estate agent] did a good job is not relevant. What is relevant is that Mr White appointed an agent, and it is well settled law that the acts of an agent, are deemed to be the acts of the principal (Mr White). When an agent enters into a contract with someone on behalf of their principal, the principal is bound by that contracting. The signature on the tenancy agreement (the contract) of the agent is deemed the signature of the principal.
It is important to emphasise that I have not heard from [real estate agent] in this dispute so I do not know what they would say, but the issue is not whether [real estate agent] did a good job for Mr White, but whether Mr White is required to hand to his tenant possession of the tenancy – and I find he is.
Section 37 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) applies. That provision confirms that: 1 Which Mr White says involves installing extractor fans. The tenant shall have vacant possession of the premises on the date on which, in accordance with the tenancy agreement, the tenant is entitled to enter into occupation of the premises.
Mr White states that the premises do not meet the Healthy Homes Standards. That is not a reason possession cannot transfer to [The tenant/s]. Mr White has 90 days from 20 September 2023 to get the premises HHS compliant.
At this stage the Tribunal will make a declaration that the tenancy is valid, and requiring Mr White to hand over possession to the tenant. If Mr White fails to comply with that, then [The tenant/s] can request a further hearing at which time I will consider making monetary orders against Mr White, which could include orders in relation to exemplary damages, compensation for any loss incurred by [The tenant/s] and general damages.
Mr White said he did not have [The tenant/s] phone number. I confirmed that I would record it in this order to assist Mr White, the number is [redacted].

Tenancy Tribunal case 4690829 — Healthy homes at 779 State Highway 35, Tirohanga, RD 1, Opotiki 3197

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4690829 — Healthy homes at 779 State Highway 35, Tirohanga, RD 1, Opotiki 3197

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions